Re: [PATCH 1/1] docs-rst: media: Don't use \small for V4L2_PIX_FMT_SRGGB10 documentation

Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2017-09-04T20:43:43Z

Em Sun, 3 Sep 2017 22:40:02 -0300
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@s-opensource.com> escreveu:

> Em Sun, 3 Sep 2017 23:12:33 +0300
> Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com> escreveu:
>
> > There appears to be an issue in using \small in certain cases on Sphinx
> > 1.4 and 1.5. Other format documents don't use \small either, remove it
> > from here as well.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> > Hi Mauro,
> >
> > What would you think of this as an alternative approach? No hacks needed.
> > Just a recognition \small could have issues. For what it's worth, I
> > couldn't reproduce the issue on Sphinx 1.4.9.
>
> Btw, there are other places where \small runs smoothly. It is *just*
> on this table that it has issues.
>
>
> >
> > Regards,
> > Sakari
> >
> > Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/pixfmt-srggb10p.rst | 11 -----------
> > 1 file changed, 11 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/pixfmt-srggb10p.rst b/Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/pixfmt-srggb10p.rst
> > index 86cd07e5bfa3..368ee61ab209 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/pixfmt-srggb10p.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/pixfmt-srggb10p.rst
> > @@ -33,13 +33,6 @@ of a small V4L2_PIX_FMT_SBGGR10P image:
> > **Byte Order.**
> > Each cell is one byte.
> >
> > -
> > -.. raw:: latex
> > -
> > - \small
>
> Interesting... yeah, that could be possible.
>
> > -
> > -.. tabularcolumns:: |p{2.0cm}|p{1.0cm}|p{1.0cm}|p{1.0cm}|p{1.0cm}|p{10.0cm}|
>
> Nah... Without tabularcolumns, LaTeX usually got sizes wrong and don't
> always place things at the right positions I'm actually considering
> adding it to all media tables, in order to be less dependent on
> LaTex automatic cells resizing - with doesn't seem to work too well.
>
> So, better to keep it, even if it works without
> \small. Btw, tried your patch here (without tabularcolumns) on
> Sphinx 1.6 (tomorrow, I'll do tests with other version). There, the
> last "(bits x-y)" ends by being wrapped to the next line.
>
> Yet, I guess the enclosed diff (or something like that) would be
> good enough (applied after my own patch, just to quickly test it).
>
> I'll play more with it tomorrow.

OK, that works. Thanks!

I rebased your patch, keeping tabularcolumns and adding blank lines
to reduce the column size.

That works really better.

I also added a second patch doing the same for srggb12p.

Thanks,
Mauro